You can't tell me other bow engineers didn't know about this. At first I thought it was gimmick but after setting up and testing thousands of bows, I can tell you it's real and it makes a difference. Bows that address these problems are much easier to tune.

Why did it take this long to address this problem and why is it only a handful of companies are looking into correcting this problem?

I don't understand the concept of making a product "good enough" it will sell. I would want to build the best product I possible could.

Companies that continue to try to improve archery and educating the consumer are really helping the industry. Eventually, those that coast or continue the same-old, same-old will eventually find smaller sales figures.

I say thank you to the bow companies that continue to push the boundaries of bow development. It helps keep people interested in our favorite past time.

i have been take some of look at ATA live, and website of archery, and i do like the look diamond deadeye make, and i would love to see quest bow to make single cam as z7 or deadeye as limb style
after wait long to curious about invaison and it doesnt surpiser me i would say i'm stick with different as i'm fan single cam bow

You can't tell me other bow engineers didn't know about this. At first I thought it was gimmick but after setting up and testing thousands of bows, I can tell you it's real and it makes a difference. Bows that address these problems are much easier to tune.

Why did it take this long to address this problem and why is it only a handful of companies are looking into correcting this problem?

I don't understand the concept of making a product "good enough" it will sell. I would want to build the best product I possible could.

Companies that continue to try to improve archery and educating the consumer are really helping the industry. Eventually, those that coast or continue the same-old, same-old will eventually find smaller sales figures.

I say thank you to the bow companies that continue to push the boundaries of bow development. It helps keep people interested in our favorite past time.

Many will will argue it hard to best a cable rod system. Some also think simple is best in bows. They got to try something different to make bows more attracting to sale from last year. Most change as been around and done over and over agian. Old timers get a kick out of new things that were done years ago and brought back. Heck want to get it right elimanate the cable rod and shoot through the cables and risors and elimanate lean all together.
DB
DB

even with flex gaurds and all these no torque systems, your never gonna eliminate all the side to side riser torque. So is it that big of an advancement in engineering...I say no. I mean I don't think it's a bad area of technology to explore, but to say that those bow companies who aren't focused these "no torque" systems are lacking anything as far as advancing bow design and technology is kinda silly

even with flex gaurds and all these no torque systems, your never gonna eliminate all the side to side riser torque. So is it that big of an advancement in engineering...I say no. I mean I don't think it's a bad area of technology to explore, but to say that those bow companies who aren't focused these "no torque" systems are lacking anything as far as advancing bow design and technology is kinda silly

I think any bow company not trying to advance the technology is very lacking whether it is tune-ability, speed, noise, whatever. Too me it means the bow company is extremely arrogant. They think the consumer is gullible enough that they make minor tweaks to bows and the consumer will still buy a new bow year or so.

As someone who sells bows, many bow shoppers are a lot smarter these days. Like all things, the internet is providing a lot more education for the consumer and this will force the bow companies to adapt or die.

Many will will argue it hard to best a cable rod system. Some also think simple is best in bows. They got to try something different to make bows more attracting to sale from last year. Most change as been around and done over and over agian. Old timers get a kick out of new things that were done years ago and brought back. Heck want to get it right elimanate the cable rod and shoot through the cables and risors and elimanate lean all together.
DB
DB

Makes me wonder why Martin's X system was never more popular. I guess many took a look and thought that backing a nock through the cables a couple inches to the string was "too busy".

I'm sure more companies will in time explore the idea of reducing torque, but I still feel the only way to get rid of it is to be rid of the cable rod/slide or roller guards all together.

On the same issue, from another era, does anynody remember the days of 4-wheel compounds, before the advent of the cable guard? Duh!!!!!!

Does anybody remember 48" bows where the side load wasn't near as severe as it is today? Duh!!!!!!!!

Martin/Rytera Silver Star Shooter
UBP Life Member
PSAA Life Member
Worldwide Scuba Diver

Funny thing

Makes me wonder why Martin's X system was never more popular. I guess many took a look and thought that backing a nock through the cables a couple inches to the string was "too busy".

I'm sure more companies will in time explore the idea of reducing torque, but I still feel the only way to get rid of it is to be rid of the cable rod/slide or roller guards all together.

On the same issue, from another era, does anynody remember the days of 4-wheel compounds, before the advent of the cable guard? Duh!!!!!!

Does anybody remember 48" bows where the side load wasn't near as severe as it is today? Duh!!!!!!!!

I walked the ATA floor with a engineer who been designing for many years. Was interesting hearing who did what and when. Bows shot great scores though back in 70's. Like he said you got to do something everthing. Torguless bow now that would be interesting.
DB

I think any bow company not trying to advance the technology is very lacking whether it is tune-ability, speed, noise, whatever. Too me it means the bow company is extremely arrogant. They think the consumer is gullible enough that they make minor tweaks to bows and the consumer will still buy a new bow year or so.

As someone who sells bows, many bow shoppers are a lot smarter these days. Like all things, the internet is providing a lot more education for the consumer and this will force the bow companies to adapt or die.

It's called planned obsolescence, it exists in about every industry and made the computer & microprocessor industry bazillions of dollars.

Bow companies are just as guilty, several of them have YEARS worth of improvements already R&D'd, patents, and designs ready for the CNC machine they hold back for the very purpose of slowly reeling in us, and our wallets in the process.

Only problem is, it works.

Definition:
Business practice of deliberately outdating an item (much before the end of its useful life) by stopping its supply or service support and introducing a newer (often incompatible) model or version. Its objective is to prod the consumer or user to abandon the currently owned item in favor of the 'upgrade.' Most prevalent in computer hardware and software industry

I think any bow company not trying to advance the technology is very lacking whether it is tune-ability, speed, noise, whatever. Too me it means the bow company is extremely arrogant. They think the consumer is gullible enough that they make minor tweaks to bows and the consumer will still buy a new bow year or so.

As someone who sells bows, many bow shoppers are a lot smarter these days. Like all things, the internet is providing a lot more education for the consumer and this will force the bow companies to adapt or die.

i would have to agree with you...

My Martin had the nitrous x cams which is the shoot through system and
I truly felt it was the easiest bow to tune and easier to shoot well than other bows I have had.

I think any bow company not trying to advance the technology is very lacking whether it is tune-ability, speed, noise, whatever. Too me it means the bow company is extremely arrogant. They think the consumer is gullible enough that they make minor tweaks to bows and the consumer will still buy a new bow year or so.

As someone who sells bows, many bow shoppers are a lot smarter these days. Like all things, the internet is providing a lot more education for the consumer and this will force the bow companies to adapt or die.

I think you missunderstood my post. I didn't say that bow companies who don't offer up new technologies are a problem, of course we as consumers want new advancements each year, I just said that the bow companies who are not choosing to focus those technologies on these no torque cable systems are'nt doing any kind of disservice to the bow industry or to us as consumers. In your our initial post you seemed to be highly impressed with all these no torque cable guard systems and bothered by those who were not persuing this technology, and the point I was trying to make is that since they don't fullly eliminate, what they say they eliminate, it's not so huge an advancement anyway and it's ok to explore other technologies. A bow is an assymetrical machine and we hold it on one side to shoot, therefore no technology can ever completely remove torque anyway, that is the human aspect of archery.

So are you saying this is a problem that doesn't exist? Or are you saying it's not worth trying to address this problem? I'm not saying any of these attempts to fix the problem are perfect but they do improve the system.

Have you ever tried to tune one of these bows that have a huge amount of rotational torque...it's impossible. I've sent an entire shipment of bows back to a manufacturer once because they would not tune. I proved it.

So are you saying this is a problem that doesn't exist? Or are you saying it's not worth trying to address this problem? I'm not saying any of these attempts to fix the problem are perfect but they do improve the system.

Have you ever tried to tune one of these bows that have a huge amount of rotational torque...it's impossible. I've sent an entire shipment of bows back to a manufacturer once because they would not tune. I proved it.

wow your not getting it. I'm saying that it's a "problem" that you can't address, can not address, can not fix it. You can never remove the human element so no technology will ever completely eliminate riser torque, or cable caurde torque or whatever you want to call it...BUT THATS OK, thats all I'm saying. If a bow company wants to give you a bow with a no torque cable guard system, THATS OK, I never said there was anyting wrong with that. I simply simply said that there is ALSO nothing wrong with bow companies who choose NOT TO develope bows with those cable guard systems. Thats it, plain and simple.

As far as tuning bows goes. That is entirely subjective to whomever is doing the tuning, and what methods they use, and wheather or not they actually know what there doing. It also has to do with who is shooting the bow and weather or not they too know what there doing. I don't know what you mean as far as "one of these bows that have a huge amount of rotational torque." As far as my personal experience, I have also sold and tuned many bows and never saw any kind of pattern that standard cable guard bows won't tune. That includes bows from the late 80' as well as all the modern new age compound bows from many different manufacturers. I never had any problems getting bows to tune, but I won't make some crazy absolute statement like, "I proved it," that's just nonsense.

1) Will Human error will always exist? Yes, but it too can be improved upon.
2) Rotational torque applied to roller or cable guard exists on all compound bows unless they are shoot thrus
3) Can bows with some rotational torque be paper tuned? yes.
4) Can bows with a lot of rotational torque be paper tuned? no they cannot.
5) Does a bow with less rotational torque shoot a wider range of spines better? Yes.
6) Do most of these new designs help eliminate some rotational torque? Yes.
7) Does this make these bows shoot better? Yes.

So why would we not want this as archers?

I get the impression that you think these changes to bows is a waste of time. Here we will have to disagree and obviously the engineers of these companies also disagree with you.

I've owned my pro shop for quite some time now and I have proven it to myself that these setups are superior to old way of doing things.

geez I don't know how you have gotten any impression. I have remained entirely neutral, JUST STATING FACTS. Did I not make it clear in my first post that bow companies who choose to produce no torque cable systems are aok with me? I never said I wouldn't shoot them or wouldn't sell them.

What exactly qualifies as a bow with "a lot of rotational torque," you still have not made this clear? Is it any bow that does not offer some kind of torque reducing cable system. Do you not sell Hoyt, or PSE, or Elite, because they all use standard cable, or roller guard systems or the models from Bowtech, G5, Darton, or Mathews that don't offer these systems, because according to you these won't shoot or tune well. It seems that your limiting your options here.

Thoughts

Originally Posted by Chris

Ok, let's break this down.

1) Will Human error will always exist? Yes, but it too can be improved upon.
2) Rotational torque applied to roller or cable guard exists on all compound bows unless they are shoot thrus
3) Can bows with some rotational torque be paper tuned? yes.
4) Can bows with a lot of rotational torque be paper tuned? no they cannot.
5) Does a bow with less rotational torque shoot a wider range of spines better? Yes.
6) Do most of these new designs help eliminate some rotational torque? Yes.
7) Does this make these bows shoot better? Yes.

So why would we not want this as archers?

I get the impression that you think these changes to bows is a waste of time. Here we will have to disagree and obviously the engineers of these companies also disagree with you.

I've owned my pro shop for quite some time now and I have proven it to myself that these setups are superior to old way of doing things.

These same engineers your talking about will have to find something different in years to come and most likely have in the past. Saw some good cams that will be very easy to tune and improvements. Carbon rod cable slide flexes quite a bit if you watch it in slow motion.
DB
DB

All bows have some rotational torque.
The only way to eliminate all rotational torque is a shoot through cable system.
If you can eliminate some of the torque, the bow will tune easier.
NOT ALL BOWS have a lot of torque.
Shorter axle bows have more than longer axle bows.
Certain cam designs cause more.

If you don't have the tools to check for it, here's an easy way.
Put your arrow in your bow. Align the arrow and the string. Now compare the string to the location of your sight pins. A right handed shooter will notice his pins are left of the string. In a perfect world they would be aligned perfectly. Now the more rotational torque, the farther left those sight pins.

You asked for some examples that have a lot of torque, here are two Bowtech 82nd airborne, Mathews Monster.

Starting in 2002, our goal was to become the central location for all Archery Shoot schedules, not just 3D. Our database includes shoots from nearly all 50 states and Canada. In 2010, we surpassed 6500 registered shoot dates. We have established ourselves as the leading provider of archery shoot information. We will continue to provide you with the most up to date Archery Tournament and Archery Event Schedules anywhere.